Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Closed Meetings

[eileen mccourt (emccourt]

To Norm: I apologize for reacting with the comment "BINGO". I wish I had
resisted that rejoinder.

To the list

I think the point that Norm is making about meetings being secret is not
accurate.  All business meetings and board meetings are open meetings at Oak
Creek Commons.  Committee meetings are open, but the times of meetings are
not always published, because the meetings have a regular group of active
members and if someone wants to participate on the committee, they will
contact a committee member to be apprised of meeting times.  All committees
publish regular meeting minutes.  There is an effort to define the roles and
responsibilities of committees more fully, and that is an effort that I am
participating in with Norm and another member to bring to the community.
The community is open to this effort, but more initiative is needed from
Norm to follow-through to a conclusion.

The problem at OCC regarding Norm's participation is operating committees
such as landscape, facilities, and community life, which Norm already
mentioned.  These committees have real time work to get done, and cannot
afford to spend the entire meeting on points of procedure, so Norm has of
late been dis-invited or asked to leave a meeting because of the disruption
his attendance often precipitates.  I am on the board, and Norm comes to
almost all board meetings, and because the board is more structured than
most committees, Norm is not disruptive at board meetings, and I think
usually has his concerns addressed. 

It seems that the lack of formal structure and strict adherence to points of
procedure in our CC&Rs is what Norm is most unhappy about in board and
committee actions.  An active project of the board is to simplify our CC&Rs
and By-laws to make them less formal without throwing the baby out with the
bathwater.  One reason for this effort is having been taken to task by Norm.
A further complication in all of this is that Norm is frequently correct in
his assessments, and has many good ideas to offer, but his unwillingness to
trust that processes unfold over time makes it hard to work with him.  Norm
actually has broad influence, some might say an inordinate amount, on what
happens at OCC, because of efforts to avoid direct conflict with him. Norm
knows I have good will toward him, and I hope he will not mind my sharing my
perspective on the list, since he has decided to bring the issue here.  

I know this list is not set up to deal with specific community conflicts,
but I do think this is something many communities deal with, as others have
noted.  Conflict resolution with our conflict resolution team, several
sessions with an outside non-violent communication facilitator trusted by
the community and by Norm, and some deep and honest two-way sharing at
community sharing circles have not been successful as yet in generating any
ease with this ongoing conflict between Norm and OCC (and it is mostly with
OCC as an organization, and not personal animosity from Norm toward
individuals, the way I read it, though personal animosity back toward him is
a frequent result).

We certainly can use some help on how to deal with difficult behaviors and
I'm confident that members who are actively participating on a committee in
conflict with Norm would be happy for ideas and suggestions.  If there
really are "secret" meetings at OCC (of course I don't know about them,
because they are 'secret"), that is not a good response to the problem.  All
I can say is I am sure it comes from a lack of stamina to deal with the real
problems a disruptive member can create in a group that wants to get things
done.

Eileen McCourt
Oak Creek Commons
Paso Robles, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Muriel Kranowski [mailto:murielk [at] vt.edu] 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:51 AM
To: Cohousing-L
Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Closed Meetings

On Sep 16, 2007, at 12:58 AM, O3C11N6G wrote:
 > However, here at Oak Creek Commons on the Central Coast of
 > California, there are committees and teams that do not feel
 > comfortable having their meetings open to anyone wanting to
 > attend.  This is especially true when there is a fear that visitors
 > may interfere with the goals and agenda or that statements about
 > certain people are meant to be confidential.

The only part of this desire to close meetings that seems defensible to me 
is that in certain kinds of meetings, statements about individuals are 
expected and they need to be confidential.

At Shadowlake Village Cohousing as at many other communities we have a 
Conflict Resolution Team whose work is intended to be entirely 
confidential.  The temporary committee that proposed members for this team 
also worked in closed session, as agreed to via whole-group consensus when 
that committee was created.  Probably any kind of nominating committee 
needs to received input and then work in closed session.  Perhaps there are 
also certain legal situations in which it may be agreed that certain 
meetings may be closed.

The key factor is whether the community as a whole accepts that these 
specific matters are inherently confidential and therefore need to have 
closed meetings. If the only people who want to have closed meetings are 
the committee or team members, that seems like an issue that the larger 
coho group should take up.

I'm curious to know what kinds of groups Norm Gauss is alluding to. Are 
they regular standing committees and teams or ad-hoc groups?  Do those 
committee members believe that their mandate includes confidentiality or 
are they just secrecy-prone for no apparent reason?

   Muriel
   Shadowlake Village Cohousing
   Blacksburg, VA

_________________________________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/